New Delhi: A Delhi court has acquitted a man accused in the 2014 Burari double-murder case, highlighting serious gaps in the prosecution’s evidence and noting that suspicion alone could not substitute for proof beyond reasonable doubt. Additional Sessions Judge Ankur Jain cited inconsistencies in witness statements, doubts regarding recoveries, and flaws in scientific reports as reasons for the acquittal, observing that the prosecution failed to establish a credible chain of circumstances against the accused.

The case pertains to the 2014 murders in which two men, Sansarpal Singh and Manoj, were found dead in an empty plot in West Kamal Vihar, Burari. The police had been alerted by a caller named Sohanvir, who identified one of the bodies as his relative Sansarpal, but could not identify the other, later confirmed to be Manoj. The prosecution alleged that Sohanvir and Lal Chand murdered the two men after consuming alcohol together and then dumped their bodies in the nearby plot.

A critical component of the prosecution’s case was the testimony of the minor son of the accused, who had initially claimed to witness his father strangling the victims with a wire following an altercation. However, the court observed that the minor later turned hostile, alleging that his earlier statement had been made “at the instance of police uncle.” In his deposition, the minor claimed that on the day of the incident, his father had taken leave from work, cooked a meal for him, and gone to bed without hosting any guests or relatives.

Judge Jain emphasized that, in the absence of substantive corroborative evidence, the retracted statement of the minor witness could not form the basis for a conviction. “In the absence of any substantive evidence merely on the basis of the statement, which the witness had retracted, it cannot form the basis for convicting the accused,” the court noted in its order dated December 1, 2025.

The court also raised questions about the recoveries made by the police, including liquor bottles, a wire, and a blood-stained bedsheet. These items were allegedly seized from open and accessible areas without corroboration from independent witnesses, undermining their credibility. Furthermore, the blood-stained bedsheet, which was purportedly used to link the accused to the murder via DNA analysis, was seized while wet, allegedly dried by police, and sent to the forensic laboratory after a delay of over three months, casting doubt on the reliability of the forensic evidence.

Additionally, Call Detail Records (CDRs) only indicated that the accused and the deceased had been in touch but did not establish their presence together at the relevant time. While a blood sample from the accused, Sohanvir, was collected, it was never subjected to chemical analysis, leaving no scientific report confirming whether he had consumed alcohol on the day of the alleged incident.

“The prosecution has failed to establish a complete and reliable chain of circumstances. Suspicion, however strong it may be, cannot take the place of proof beyond reasonable doubt,” Judge Jain said, acquitting the accused on these grounds.

The co-accused Lal Chand had been granted interim bail during the trial but failed to appear subsequently. He was declared proclaimed offender in April 2023.

This verdict underscores the critical importance of credible, corroborated evidence in criminal trials, particularly when cases hinge on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of vulnerable witnesses. The court’s decision reflects a careful evaluation of the forensic, testimonial, and procedural aspects of the investigation, ultimately leading to the conclusion that the prosecution did not meet the stringent standard required for conviction.

The Burari double-murder case has been under scrutiny for over a decade, and this acquittal marks a significant development in a case fraught with investigative lapses, highlighting the challenges of securing convictions in cases where evidence is fragmented, delayed, or otherwise compromised.